Tiberius Posted December 17, 2018 Posted December 17, 2018 3 minutes ago, Deranged Rhino said: I'm just getting done with a spat of morning calls re the new indictments in the Flynn matter so I have to read this still. Expectations, based on its origin from the SSCI (the swampiest committee on the Hill, home of the Wolfe business) I anticipate it to be largely overblown if not outright fiction. Will report back when I read in full Sounds like you have already made up your mind to try and discredit the fact Putin was/is helping Trump. Why would you do that?
The_Dude Posted December 17, 2018 Posted December 17, 2018 1 minute ago, Tiberius said: Sounds like you have already made up your mind to try and discredit the fact Putin was/is helping Trump. Why would you do that? Ya know, I’d love to criticize Trump for all this but I believe in fair treatment. The Clinton Foundation was a pay-to-play organization that was illegally influencing American politics for years and the justice department turned a blind eye or actively assisted. As such, I don’t care if there’s any truth to the Putin rumors. Further, Trump did NOT win because of Putin. 1
Tiberius Posted December 17, 2018 Posted December 17, 2018 Just now, The_Dude said: Ya know, I’d love to criticize Trump for all this but I believe in fair treatment. The Clinton Foundation was a pay-to-play organization that was illegally influencing American politics for years and the justice department turned a blind eye or actively assisted. As such, I don’t care if there’s any truth to the Putin rumors. Further, Trump did NOT win because of Putin. You don't know if Trump won because of Putin. Why would you even say that? The real question is why Putin helped is helping him? Your "Whataboutism" on Clinton foundation is silly. You hit a "whataboutism, a distracting question and an unprovable fact all in one post!! Nice job, you Trump lover.
Deranged Rhino Posted December 17, 2018 Posted December 17, 2018 7 minutes ago, Tiberius said: Sounds like you have already made up your mind to try and discredit the fact Putin was/is helping Trump. Why would you do that? The evidence has already shown this to be the case. I just follow the evidence. If that position changes when I read this report, I'll let you know. But based on its origin and how up to their elbows they all are in the palace coup attempt, I'm not going to hold my breath. Just now, Tiberius said: You don't know if Trump won because of Putin. Why would you even say that? The real question is why Putin helped is helping him? Your "Whataboutism" on Clinton foundation is silly. You hit a "whataboutism, a distracting question and an unprovable fact all in one post!! Nice job, you Trump lover. It's not whataboutism when Clinton was directly paying a foreign intelligence officer to gather dirt from Russian/Putin sources. It's apples to apples.
The_Dude Posted December 17, 2018 Posted December 17, 2018 3 minutes ago, Tiberius said: Your "Whataboutism" on Clinton foundation is silly. You hit a "whataboutism, a distracting question and an unprovable fact all in one post!! Nice job, you Trump lover. Its not silly you jackwagon. It’s quite right to be concerned that the justice department is a 5th column of the Democrats. That’s way more concerning to me than Russians posting memes on Facebook, and Trump paying off whores.
boyst Posted December 17, 2018 Posted December 17, 2018 41 minutes ago, GG said: What's so hard to comprehend? A real report was delivered to the Senate Intel Committee, and was conveniently leaked to WaPo. Are you disputing that the existence of the report itself is fiction? The leak is where I take issue with the bend of the narrative. Knowing a leaked report would spurn a dishonest article the leaker created disinformation from an actual report to down play any possibility of it being taken serious. This makes it more palatable to those who want to believe in "muh Russian collusion" and continues to serve Putin's agenda which was actually division of the country as the Trump fanboys just see this article as more proof of dishonesty and evidence a swamp exists with the SSIC.
B-Man Posted December 17, 2018 Posted December 17, 2018 Quote Ken DilanianVerified account @KenDilanianNBC FollowFollow @KenDilanianNBC The Russians set up 30 Facebook pages targeting the black community and 10 Youtube channels that posted 571 videos related to police violence against African-Americans. YouTube was wrong when it said last year that Russian content did not target a segment of U.S. society. . So the Russians used liberal talking points? ..............................COLLUSION . 2
Deranged Rhino Posted December 17, 2018 Posted December 17, 2018 Just now, B-Man said: . So the Russians used liberal talking points? ..............................COLLUSION . Added bonus, it comes from Fusion Ken, aka CIA Ken, aka the guy who runs his stories past his handlers in Langley before publishing, aka the guy who was on Fusion GPS's payroll... The fact Ken still has a job in any serious media outlet is pretty amazing.
Tiberius Posted December 17, 2018 Posted December 17, 2018 25 minutes ago, The_Dude said: Its not silly you jackwagon. It’s quite right to be concerned that the justice department is a 5th column of the Democrats. That’s way more concerning to me than Russians posting memes on Facebook, and Trump paying off whores. Oh! So why is Putin helping Trump? And why are so many Trumptards trying to distort this relationship? America haters? 34 minutes ago, Deranged Rhino said: The evidence has already shown this to be the case. I just follow the evidence. If that position changes when I read this report, I'll let you know. But based on its origin and how up to their elbows they all are in the palace coup attempt, I'm not going to hold my breath. It's not whataboutism when Clinton was directly paying a foreign intelligence officer to gather dirt from Russian/Putin sources. It's apples to apples. This isn't about Clinton. At all. This story here has nothing to do with the Steel Dossier--which is still 100% spot on, right? Nothings been proven wrong yet
Deranged Rhino Posted December 17, 2018 Posted December 17, 2018 7 minutes ago, Tiberius said: This isn't about Clinton. At all. This story here has nothing to do with the Steel Dossier--which is still 100% spot on, right? Nothings been proven wrong yet Nothing has been proven correct in the Steele Dossier... Other than there is indeed a man named Donald Trump.
ExiledInIllinois Posted December 17, 2018 Posted December 17, 2018 https://m.huffpost.com/us/entry/us_5c15302ee4b05d7e5d827572/amp?ncid=NEWSSTAND0001 Yeah, HuffPost, but pretty straightforward when it come to Constitutional questions. Guess what Guys (& Gals)... Thus, when Trump and his supporters claim “collusion” is not a “crime” under U.S. law, it’s largely irrelevant, whether it’s true or not. A presidential campaign conspiring with a foreign power that interferes on its behalf in an election rises to the level of impeachment if the Congress says it does. A Laundry List Of Charges Even if Trump isn’t shown to have conspired with Russia on election interference, his repeated lies to the American people about his connections to the Kremlin while he worked with Russia on a personal business project, the Trump Tower Moscow, well into the campaign, could rightly be viewed as an impeachable offense. And even before the Cohen filings made the timeline of that deal clear, Trump’s calls for better relations with the Russian government, including lifting sanctions and changing American policy in Ukraine, could be viewed as an impeachable case of putting his own selfish interests before the United States’.
Deranged Rhino Posted December 17, 2018 Posted December 17, 2018 So now it's, "Russian collusion never happened, no conspiracy happened to tilt the election... but we're going to keep going after him anyway because we were promised a scalp." So sad, Exiled. Why focus on facts and evidence when you can spread brainless conjecture. 1
ExiledInIllinois Posted December 17, 2018 Posted December 17, 2018 Just now, Deranged Rhino said: So now it's, "Russian collusion never happened, no conspiracy happened to tilt the election... but we're going to keep going after him anyway because we were promised a scalp." So sad, Exiled. Why focus on facts and evidence when you can spread brainless conjecture. No. It happened. Why are you so hell bent on protecting corrupt demagogue?
Deranged Rhino Posted December 17, 2018 Posted December 17, 2018 1 minute ago, ExiledInIllinois said: No. It happened. You have no evidence to support this position, yet you believe it fully. That used to be called being a "conspiracy theorist" - where you fully believe in something despite the complete absence of evidence, and ignore any information that runs counter to your belief.
boyst Posted December 17, 2018 Posted December 17, 2018 3 minutes ago, Deranged Rhino said: You have no evidence to support this position, yet you believe it fully. That used to be called being a "conspiracy theorist" - where you fully believe in something despite the complete absence of evidence, and ignore any information that runs counter to your belief. Sort of like God. There are only 3 things to believe: God, Mama, and Muh Russia.
The_Dude Posted December 17, 2018 Posted December 17, 2018 11 minutes ago, ExiledInIllinois said: No. It happened. Why are you so hell bent on protecting corrupt demagogue? Trump is NOT a demagogue.
GG Posted December 17, 2018 Posted December 17, 2018 8 minutes ago, The_Dude said: Trump is NOT a demagogue. Of course he is. A coarse one, as well. 1
ExiledInIllinois Posted December 17, 2018 Posted December 17, 2018 Has anybody noticed how many of the people (different people) on the PPP echo chamber are fighting me since I came to visit here? It's because it's an echo chamber here. That's what happens in echo chambers. It's like 2002-2003 before the ramp up to war. Everybody here was so sure the war was the right thing. And if they didn't believe it was right, they tacitly went over the cliff with the other lemmings in the echo chamber. What was my position. That you all were being snowed. You are being snowed again to believe things are a "witch hunt." I am not saying trust everything the government is spewing. At least have a moral compass. You are watching checks and balances eviserate a dangerous authoritarian. Honestly... The man is corrupt and unfit. Simply remove him and move on. Admit, He's the wrong answer for America. We can just agree to disagree on the minutia. You won't see a corrupt businessman engaging in collusion, currying favor... I will. Leave it at that. Put down the entrenchment tool. It's best for all. 2 minutes ago, GG said: Of course he is. A coarse one, as well. Thanks... I know we disagree Glenn... But don't go off the cliff with the other's. I will try and check myself from my inherent Left leanings.
GG Posted December 17, 2018 Posted December 17, 2018 Or the simpler explanation that there are a lot of newbies here who've never engaged with the Riddler? They quickly learn. 3 minutes ago, ExiledInIllinois said: Thanks... I know we disagree Glenn... But don't go off the cliff with the other's. I will try and check myself from my inherent Left leanings. Trump being a demagogue doesn't validate your points at all
The_Dude Posted December 17, 2018 Posted December 17, 2018 9 minutes ago, GG said: Of course he is. A coarse one, as well. No. No he’s not. He’s genuine. Hillary is a demagogue.
Recommended Posts